Author
Topic: I think I have an idea (Read 6367 times)

Well T,why not 100,000 or even a million.They must surely work as hard and assume as much risk as a lazy millionaire. If we put maximumas and minimums on you soon lose all incentive.50 grand a year to flip burgers at McDonalds?Thats laughable. Why would anyone want to study hard to be a doctor or put their life on the line as a policeman or risk their hard earned money in a business if they could only make the same as a burger flipper?Risk must be rewarded or we would soon lose the risk takers.It's not a perfect world out there,but until then you can go to Walgreens!!!!

I am a firm believer that if we got closer to full employment wages will rise because employers will have to compete for the labor force.

they always do. during the (nasty) bush admin, when we had full employment, even MickyDs was advertising better than min wage because they were begging for workers. the lower the unemployment rate, the higher the pay. the less government takes from business, the more business has to expand and hire. there is nothing that the government can do to make an economy better except to remove as many restrictions and obstacles to business as possible.

if business sees a path to profit, it will take it. along the way, they hire more people and the more hired, the more competition in the workplace, and the higher the wage.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

And Luvin Honey,On the corporate welfare,lets side track a step or two. If someone has a farm have they received government subsidies? Is that not the equivalent of corporate welfare? Not really,farmers have actually been paid not to produce. But since you mentioned the family farm and corporate welfare I figure this is a relevant question.

Republicans lost because of their "Hurray for me and screw you" attitiude towards the less fortunate or as Romney describes as the 47% who just wants stuff. My Father spent 32 years in the USAF and escaped from a German POW camp saving the lives of some of his comrades. I spent 24 years in law enforcement. My two kids are in the USAF one of which spent 5 tours in Iraq.

I don't have health care now due to my state gutting the health insurance component of my pension under Bush. I guess that makes me one of the 47% that wants stuff. Thanks to President Obama, I'll finally be able to afford health insurance.

I have an idea, instead of critcizing and blaming others, let's start working together and finding common ground to solve problems.

California gutted your retirement!! Are you sure your municipality just didn't go broke and your pension went away along with the bond holders money? And guess what! your family is not the only ones who have served. California is hopelessly broke and your states grand beneficence will soon call on the rest of us to pay for your fine lifestyle over the years. Don't worry, Bathhouse Barry isn't going to let his base go hungry.

wow. if i had kids in the military right now, i'd be counseling them to get out. as for the rest of it? talk to me again in a few years. it's not a screw you attitude. it's a we can't afford all this stuff attitude.

you do seem to want stuff. you want me to pay for your stuff. i don't know why you think i should pay for your stuff?

how about instead of criticizing me for not wanting to be responsible for everyone else, you take care of you, and i'll take care of me?

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

I didn't retire in California Vance and there really isn't much you know about me or my lifestyle. It's people like you and Kathy P that cost you the election with your bitterness and judgement of others. Thanks!

No, it's people like you who spent 24 years on a job and didn't put enough away to care for yourself, so now you want others to use their savings and bail you out. I have never made Tbeek's imaginary 50,000 in one year in my life, and have no retirement income other than SS. I have medical coverage, money in my pocket, food on my table, and a roof over my head. I also have a bit left to leave to my kids. I have no desire to spend that bit on someone who spent all they ever made and have no way to get the things they need now. Nor on those who have never worked and never intend to.

PS. I'm also a combat veteran.

Logged

"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

And Luvin Honey,On the corporate welfare,lets side track a step or two. If someone has a farm have they received government subsidies? Is that not the equivalent of corporate welfare? Not really,farmers have actually been paid not to produce. But since you mentioned the family farm and corporate welfare I figure this is a relevant question.

When the program first started in the good ol' days, farmers were paid to NOT produce, thus dropping supply and increasing the prices.

These days, farmers are paid when the price drops below a certain point. So, the more bushels the farmer has, the more payments they will get. As in many things, it most benefits the huge producers.

Logged

The pedigree of honey Does not concern the bee; A clover, any time, to him Is aristocracy. ---Emily Dickinson

that is not to say that there should not be some safety net for folks who have bad things happen. it should be limited in amount and time. it should not reward bad behavior. it certainly should not be a career choice or generational life style. as my father said when he kicked my brother out the door "starvation is a great motivator!".

Totally agree. I don't want my hard-earned money going to slackers, either. It's harder when there's a genuine recession and not too many jobs to be found.

Logged

The pedigree of honey Does not concern the bee; A clover, any time, to him Is aristocracy. ---Emily Dickinson

Luvinhoney you have an anticapitalist pro socialist mindset.I have a struggling small, because of the economy, construction business. When I had several employees I paid them pretty good and gave them benefits in the form of health ins. bonuses ect. But i didn't pay them all the same wage because they were not worth the same wage. I had supervisers, equipment operators, truck drivers, labors ect. I try to pay them what they are worth and the fact is some employes are worth more then others. To expect an employer to have to pay everyone the same is not at all fair to the person who tries harder and does a better job then the person working beside him or her. If you paid a minimum wage that was equal to the average family income to a person putting lettuce on hamburgers at Mac Donalds then the price of a hamburger would not be affordable. And that would have the same affect on that persons attitude as The War on Poverty has had on the ones on the receiving end of that Govt. program. Which is. Why should I work any harder or try to learn more when I'm getting the same pay as my boss?

I never suggested any of the things you state above. I've worked through college and now work for an employer as well as having my own small business. I do NOT want to be earning the same $ as I did at the jobs that got me through college. What I said is all jobs should have a living wage, even if it provides a very modest living.

I have no problem with bosses earning more than their employees, even far more. But 100s of times more? That's getting downright ridiculous and greedy.

Logged

The pedigree of honey Does not concern the bee; A clover, any time, to him Is aristocracy. ---Emily Dickinson

I am a firm believer that if we got closer to full employment wages will rise because employers will have to compete for the labor force.This is where health care came about as a benefit. But I have also seen people behind the counters at McDonalds and such places that I question if minimum wage may be too much. Most people start at minimum wage and work their way up. The ones that do nothing to advance their position in life are not automatically entitled to the fruits of those who do.But many a libs think the only way you make a good living is stealing away someone elses. I can tell you if I ran a business with employees that worked directly with the public and they came in with a face full of hardware,it would do little to encourage me to hire them. I know it's personal expression and all that,but it would not be the image I would want my business expressing. And many of these kids are the ones getting stuck in low end jobs.

I basically agree with what you're stating above. I would raise the minimum wage. Not to equal $50,000 per year, but at least to $20,000.

Logged

The pedigree of honey Does not concern the bee; A clover, any time, to him Is aristocracy. ---Emily Dickinson

20K is what will keep a small family dependant on assistance of some form. Ask any PFC w/ a wife and kid.

I thought 'someone' wanted to know what a 'Living Wage' would look like, guess not.

In answer to iddee's earlier Q; I believe I'd take the route of luvinhoney's relatives and 'save' my company and my employees jobs by taking less and working harder to keep it going, which I've personally experienced and appears to be what is expected by the majority of these posts, both the hate filled ones and the ones seeking common ground. That self-responsibility thing ;) seems to be the only thing most can agree on.

IMO; the rest is all a distractions.

Logged

"Trust those who seek the truth, doubt those who say they've found it."

I didn't retire in California Vance and there really isn't much you know about me or my lifestyle. It's people like you and Kathy P that cost you the election with your bitterness and judgement of others. Thanks!

I'm so sorry for what you've faced. You'd think a long military service would be thanked in a meaningful way, and wanting healthcare coverage sure doesn't seem excessive to me.

iddee and kathy--I can't believe you said what you did. Are you serious? If BB was promised one thing, then had it pulled out and now needs to provide it on his own for his family, you don't think that might affect his ability to save for retirement? Seriously, have you no hearts or compassion at all? If you can say this to BB, it helps me understand the level of bitterness and meanness in this election.

I agree with BB that this bitterness coming out of Romney lost him the election. Does anyone remember the American Dream anymore? The dream was if I worked hard, I had a decent life. Not that I work hard to provide some fat cat an exorbitant life, and then have a lot of what I've worked for taken away by someone else. People are fed up.

Tbeek--A living wage would be different in different parts of the country. When I pulled $20,000 out of the air, I was basing it on a 2-income family. Many people would be able to live on $40,000/year. Your $50,000 would be much more desirable!

Personally, I would have loved to have been able to raise my kids without working outside the home. Unfortunately, DH is a farmer and we had no health insurance, so I've worked our entire marriage to provide HI for the family. Last year, my company pulled health ins. as a benefit for people working my hours. I'm pretty sure my bosses have not had pay cuts, but I had to give up HI. I'm not bitter, but I'm not too enthused, either. My in-laws want to retire, but my FIL had cancer (cured) and so I'm very grateful for the new preexisting condition clause, for their sake.

Logged

The pedigree of honey Does not concern the bee; A clover, any time, to him Is aristocracy. ---Emily Dickinson

No, it's people like you who spent 24 years on a job and didn't put enough away to care for yourself, so now you want others to use their savings and bail you out. I have never made Tbeek's imaginary 50,000 in one year in my life, and have no retirement income other than SS. I have medical coverage, money in my pocket, food on my table, and a roof over my head. I also have a bit left to leave to my kids. I have no desire to spend that bit on someone who spent all they ever made and have no way to get the things they need now. Nor on those who have never worked and never intend to.

PS. I'm also a combat veteran.

DH and I have been putting away since we got married. Savings, CDs, stock market. Even when we barely earned enough to pay the bills.

So, iddee, not saying this to be self righteous, but tell me what I would have done if I'd needed to retire during a major stock market downturn? We've seen our stocks double, crash, go up, crash back down. It's all in the timing. Even if someone had done exactly as you advocate above, they may be unable to cash in on it precisely when they need to.

Logged

The pedigree of honey Does not concern the bee; A clover, any time, to him Is aristocracy. ---Emily Dickinson

I have no problem with bosses earning more than their employees, even far more. But 100s of times more? That's getting downright ridiculous and greedy.

would you have the government regulate earnings (more than they do)? if you don't like the way a company does business, don't patronize them. other than that, it's up to the workers and the share holders to determine how things go.the richest people in the country (dems most of them) made their money off the ideas they had and the risks they took. why should they not profit as much as they wish from what they developed?

Quote

Are you serious? If BB was promised one thing, then had it pulled out and now needs to provide it on his own for his family, you don't think that might affect his ability to save for retirement? Seriously, have you no hearts or compassion at all? If you can say this to BB, it helps me understand the level of bitterness and meanness in this election.

it's not bitterness. it's the realization that the majority of the country now expects to get money and benefits from the rest of the country. and the realization that they will keep voting to get that money and stuff. i'm guessing that BB belonged to a union and that that union squeezed the public until there was nothing left and reorganization was required. there's not a heck of a lot of difference between welfare and pubic sector union thuggery. in the end, it costs someone something. take a look at Hostess.

as long as people like you are feeling sorry for people who don't care for themselves, we'll continue down this road. when you are ready to stand up and say "you are responsible for you", we might have a chance to get things straightened out.

Quote

When I pulled $20,000 out of the air, I was basing it on a 2-income family. Many people would be able to live on $40,000/year. Your $50,000 would be much more desirable!

there is no difference between your 20,000 and tbeeks 50. it's still government mandated manipulation of wages. in order to manipulate wages and have it work, you need to control prices too. wage and price control have been tried and they don't work.

Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....